OIC-2009 - ONTOLOGY FOR THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY

New York State Center of Excellence in Bioinformatics & Life Sciences

R T U

Shahid MANZOOR, Werner CEUSTERS, Barry SMITH Center of Excellence in Bioinformatics and Life Sciences

University at Buffalo, NY, USA

http://www.org.buffalo.edu/RTU

OIC-2009 - ONTOLOGY FOR THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY:

Referent Tracking for Command & Control Messaging Systems Fairfax, VA - 21-22 October 2009


R T U

Ultimate goal of Referent Tracking

A digital copy of the world


R T U

Requirements for this digital copy R1: A faithful representation of reality R2: … of everything that is digitally registered, what is generic scientific theories – ontologies

what is specific what individual entities exist and how they relate to each other – referent tracking systems

R3: … throughout reality’s entire history R4: … which is computable in order to allow queries over the world’s past and present, make predictions, fill in gaps, identify mistakes, ...


R T U

R1: A faithful representation of reality … on three levels: 1.  First-order reality – is as it is prior to any cognitive

agent’s perception thereof; 2.  Cognitive representations of this reality embodied in

observations and interpretations on the part of cognitive agents;

3.  Publicly accessible concretizations of these cognitive representations – artifacts representing first order reality (including ontologies, terminologies and data repositories)

Smith B, Kusnierczyk W, Schober D, Ceusters W. Towards a Reference Terminology for Ontology Research and Development in the Biomedical Domain. Proceedings of KR-MED 2006, November 8, 2006, Baltimore MD, USA


R T U

Referent Tracking System sourceforge.net/projects/rtsystem/


R T U

Referent Tracking System Components •  Referent Tracking Software

Manipulation of statements about facts and beliefs

•  Referent Tracking Datastore: •  IUI repository A collection of globally unique singular identifiers

denoting particulars •  Referent Tracking Database A collection of facts and beliefs about the particulars

denoted in the IUI repository

Manzoor S, Ceusters W, Rudnicki R. Implementation of a Referent Tracking System. International Journal of Healthcare Information Systems and Informatics 2007;2(4):41-58.


R T U

Elementary RTS tuple types

Relationships between particulars taken from a realism-based relation ontology Instantiation of a universal

Annotation using terms from a non-realist terminology ‘Negative findings’ such as absences, missing parts, preventions, … Names for a particular


R T U

Formalism includes management of changes 1.  changes in the underlying reality:

•  Particulars come into being, change and die

2.  reassessments of what is considered to be relevant for inclusion (usefulness)

3.  encoding of mistakes introduced during data entry or ontology development (who, when …)

4.  changes in our knowledge of this reality •  Abdul Abdullah never existed


R T U

Formalism includes management of changes 1.  changes in the underlying reality:

•  Particulars come into being, change and die

2.  reassessments of what is considered to be relevant for inclusion (usefulness)

3.  encoding of mistakes introduced during data entry or ontology development (who, when …)

4.  changes in our knowledge of this reality •  ‘Abdul Abdullah’ never had a referent


R T U

Referent Tracking UCore, C2 Core …

Generic versus Specific Entities

1. First-order

reality

2. Beliefs (knowledge)

Generic Specific

GOAL

ATTACK STRATEGY

John Doe’s plan SACEUR’s

strategy

TANK

PERSON

CORPSE

building

SOLDIER

WEAPON

John Doe’s

platoon

Tank with serial number TH1280A44V

John Doe’s gun

Private John Doe

3. Representation ‘weapon’ ‘person’ ‘tank’ ‘John Doe’ ‘Enola Gay’


R T U

A simple battlefield ontology

building person vehicle

tank soldier POW

weapon

mortar submachine

gun car

object

corpse

Spatial region located-in

transforms-in

Ontology


R T U

Ontology used for annotating a situation

building person vehicle

tank soldier POW

weapon

mortar submachine

gun car

object

corpse

Spatial region located-in

transforms-in Ontology

Situation


R T U

Referent Tracking (RT) for representing a situation

#1 #2 #3 #4 #10

Ontology

Situational model

Situation

#5 #6 #8 #7

uses uses

uses

uses uses


R T U

use the same weapon

use the same type of weapon

Referent Tracking preserves identity

#2 #3 #4 #10

Ontology

Situational model

Situation

#6 #8 #7

uses

uses

uses uses


R T U

Advantages of Referent Tracking •  Preserves identity •  Allows us to assert relationships amongst specific

entities as well as generic relations holding at the type level


R T U

faithful

Specific relations versus generic relations

#1 #2 #3 #4 #10

Ontology

Situational model

Situation

#5 #6 #8 #7

uses uses

uses

uses uses


R T U

Specific relations versus generic relations

Ontology

Situational model

Situation

NOT faithful uses


R T U

Advantages of Referent Tracking •  Preserves identity •  Allows to assert relationships amongst entities that

are not generically true •  Allows appropriate representation of the times at

which relationships hold


R T U

Temporal validity of specific relationships (1)

#3

Ontology

Situational model

Situation

soldier

private sergeant sergeant-major

at t1 at t2 at t3


R T U


#1 #2

Ontology

Situational model

Situation

#5 #6

uses at t1

uses at t1


R T U


#1 #2

Ontology

Situational model

Situation

#5 uses at t2

after the death of #1 at t2


R T U


are not generically true •  Appropriate representation of the time when

relationships hold •  Deals with conflicting representations by keeping

track of sources


R T U

Source of information

#1 #2

Situational model

Situation

#5 #6

uses at t1

uses at t1

uses at t2

at t3

Ontology corpse

asserts at t2


R T U

Source of information

#1 #2

Situational model

Situation

#5 #6

uses at t1

uses at t1

uses at t2

at t3

Ontology corpse

asserts at t4


R T U

Need for change and belief management •  Distinct sensors may hold different beliefs about whether

a specific incident (e.g. #17980232) –  really happened –  is of a specific sort –  counts as a security breach

•  depending on what definition or rules they apply.

•  They may differ in beliefs about –  what caused the incident –  how to prevent future happenings of incidents of the same sort.

•  They may change their beliefs over time.


R T U


R T U


R T U


are not generically true •  Appropriate representation of the time when

relationships hold •  Deals with conflicting representations by keeping

track of sources •  Mimics the structure of reality


R T U

Once again the 3-level distinction •  Level 1:

–  #120: an incident that happened; •  Level 2:

–  #213: the interpretation by some cognitive agent that #120 is an security breach;

–  #31: the expectation by some cognitive agent that similar incidents might happen in the future;

•  Level 3: –  #402: an entry in and information system concerning #120; –  #1503: an entry in some other information system about #31 for

mitigation or prevention purposes.


R T U

Advantages of Referent Tracking •  Preserves identity •  Allows to assert relationships amongst entities that are not

generically true •  Appropriate representation of the time when relationships

hold •  Deals with conflicting representations by keeping track of

sources •  Mimics the structure of reality •  Allows for corrections without distorting what was

originally believed


R T U

Mismatches between reality and representations •  Some possibilities:

1.  #120 with unjustified absence of #213 : •  #120 was not perceived at all, or not assessed as being a security breach

2.  Unjustified presence of #213 : •  There was no #120 at all, or #120 was not a security breach

3.  Unjustified absence of #402 •  Same reasons as under (1) above •  Justified presence of #213 but not reported in the information system

–  …

Ceusters W, Smith B. A Realism-Based Approach to the Evolution of Biomedical Ontologies. Proceedings of AMIA 2006, Washington DC, 2006;:121-125.


R T U

UCORE 2.0 •  Built to facilitate sharing of US Govt.-related data. •  Uses XML as a standard format for information

exchange. •  Provides consensus representations under the

heading of Who, What, When and Where terms


R T U

UCORE XML Message <ulex:PublishMessage> <ulex:PDMessageMetadata> <ulex:ULEXImplementation> <ulex:ULEXImplementationName>ucore-message</ulex:ULEXImplementationName> </ulex:ULEXImplementation> </ulex:PDMessageMetadata> <ulex:DataSubmitterMetadata> <ucore:SystemIdentifier>ESS</ucore:SystemIdentifier> <ucore:SystemContact> <ddms:Organization> <ddms:name>Army Net-Centric Data Strategy Center of Excellence</ddms:name> </ddms:Organization> </ucore:SystemContact> </ulex:DataSubmitterMetadata> <ulex:DataItemPackage> <ucore:Digest> …


R T U

<ulex:ULEXImplementationName>ucore-message</ulex:ULEXImplementationName>

</ulex:ULEXImplementation> </ulex:PDMessageMetadata> <ulex:DataSubmitterMetadata> <ucore:SystemIdentifier>ESS</ucore:SystemIdentifier> <ucore:SystemContact> <ddms:Organization> <ddms:name>Army Net-Centric Data Strategy Center of

Excellence</ddms:name> </ddms:Organization>


R T U

UCORE XML Message (3) <ucore:Identifier ucore:code="UnitShortName" ucore:codespace="http://

metadata.dod.mil/mdr/ns/readiness/reporting/1.0" ucore:label="Short name for this military unit.">4th Brigade</ucore:Identifier>

<ucore:What ucore:code="Organization" ucore:codespace="http://ucore.gov/ucore/2.0/codespace/"/>

</ucore:Organization> <ucore:Entity id="ID_0002"> <ucore:Descriptor>Represents a Readiness Report for a military unit.</

ucore:Descriptor> <ucore:SimpleProperty ucore:code="TrainingResourceAreaLevel"

ucore:codespace="http://metadata.dod.mil/mdr/ns/readiness/reporting/1.0" ucore:label="Measured resource area level for training. Integer from 1 to 6. Indicates the measured resource area for training. ">1</ucore:SimpleProperty>


R T U

<ucore:What ucore:code="Document" ucore:codespace="http://ucore.gov/ucore/2.0/codespace/"/>

<ucore:What ucore:code="ReadinessReport" ucore:codespace="http://metadata.dod.mil/mdr/ns/readiness/reporting/1.0"/>

</ucore:Entity> <ucore:AffiliatedWith id="ID_0003"> <ucore:ThingRef ref="ID_0001"/> <ucore:ThingRef ref="ID_0002"/> </ucore:AffiliatedWith>


R T U

Applying RT to UCore Messages

RTS

Middleware

Reasoner

Rules

Ontology reads XML Message

Communicate with RTS to assign IUI to entity referred to in XML message

UCORE Messages


R T U

Advantages of Referent Tracking •  Preserves identity •  Allows to assert relationships amongst entities that are not

generically true •  Appropriate representation of the time when relationships

hold •  Deals with conflicting representations by keeping track of

sources •  Mimics the structure of reality •  Allows for corrections without distorting what was

originally believed •  Fully compatible with semantic web technologies


R T U

Objectives •  Parsing UCORE XML messages

– Analyze representations of message content in RTS • what sorts of entities are involved?

– L1 /L2 /L3

• what are the relationships found between these entities?

• which UCORE types are instantiated? – Validation of XML messages on ontological grounds – Reasoning with XML message content


R T U

Message Parsing into Triples (Step 1) •  Iterates over the XML

message through a Depth First strategy –  Treats each XML

element as a relation between possible entities

–  In Step 1 middleware does not yet use any knowledge of ontology or RTS

rts:1002 ulex:PublishMessage rts:1003 rts:1003 DataSubmitterMetadata rts:1006 rts:1006 SystemIdentifier “ESS” rts:1006 SystemContact rts:1007 rts:1007 Organization rts:1008 rts:1008 name “Army Net-

Centric …

<ulex:PublishMessage> <ulex:DataSubmitterMetadata> <ucore:SystemIdentifier> ESS </ucore:SystemIdentifier> <ucore:SystemContact> <ddms:Organization> <ddms:name>Army Net-Centric Data

Strategy Center of Excellence </ddms:name>

</ddms:Organization>


R T U

Step 1: XML Transformation into Triples Visualization


R T U

Step 2: Triples Transformation By Rules •  Use rules to add or remove triples •  A rule based on triples divided into parts:

– Head: Transformation Pattern – Body: Search pattern

e.g.: ?x ulex:PublishMessage ?y -> ?x ro:instanceof uc:Document

If two putative entities are linked by the ulex:PublishMessage element, then the first is of type UCore:document


R T U

Output after the execution of step 2


R T U



R T U



R T U

Tracking of Entities (Step 3) •  Resolve whether an entity is already assigned an

IUI or not. •  Suppose that the middleware receives a second

message. The message refers to the 4th Brigade. So during the execution of this step, reference to this military unit will be effected through IUI #1011, which was already registered for it in the RTS.


R T U

Message 2: After the processing of three steps


R T U

Reasoning validation •  In the second message, the supply level (#2019) of

unit #1011’s stock of equipment #9001 is ‘2’ •  Implemented rule: if the supply level for this type

of equipment is less then 3, then generate an alert to the effect that the troops are not ready for the mission:

(?x uct:hasEquipmentSupplies ?y) (?z uct:equipmentSuppliesLevelOf ?y) (?z readiness.reporting:EquipmentSuppliesResourceAreaLevel ?l) lessThan

(?l, 3) -> print(“The unit ”, ?x, “ is not ready for mission”)


R T U

Conclusion: Generalizability •  The approach can be used to reason with messages

in single formats such as UCore 2.0 Taxonomy •  but also to integrate messages with different

formats, such as UCore and JBML / NIEM/ JC3IEDM

•  Goal: to create fully automatized interoperability corridors between existing silos of legacy data

Documents

OIC-2009 - ONTOLOGY FOR THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY